House acts to end some food label warnings

By ZACHARY COILE, SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE

Published
10:00 pm PST, Wednesday, March 8, 2006

WASHINGTON -- The House approved a bill Wednesday night that would wipe out state laws on safety labeling of food, potentially affecting alerts about carcinogenic ingredients, lead in candy and allergy-causing sulfites.

The vote was a victory for the food industry, which has lobbied for years for national standards for food labeling and contributed millions of dollars to lawmakers' campaigns. But consumer groups and state regulators warned that the bill would undo more than 200 state laws, including California's 1986 landmark Proposition 65, that protect public health.

"The purpose of this legislation is to keep the public from knowing about the harm they may be exposed to in food," said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., a chief critic of the measure.

Several critics argued that the bill was rushed through the House without complete hearings as a favor to a specific industry -- at the same time that members are talking about the evils of lobbying and proposing stricter ethical rules.

Under the bill, any state that wanted to keep its tougher standards for food labeling would have to ask for approval from the Food and Drug Administration, which has been criticized by food safety groups as slow to issue consumer warnings.

The measure passed 283-139, with the support of many Democrats. The House did amend the bill to allow states to continue to issue warnings about the health effects of mercury in fish and shellfish.

The legislation faces a tougher battle in the more evenly divided Senate, and there are signs of growing opposition to the measure. California's two Democratic senators are threatening to block the bill from coming to the Senate floor.

A group of 39 state attorneys general, including many Republicans, has warned of the consequences of the measure. A spokeswoman for Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna said the state did not endorse a letter of opposition to the legislation because it was received too late for review.

Critics say the state laws have added costs for food manufacturers and distributors, who must comply with different rules in different states. The industry's backers claim the different labels confuse consumers.

"There is no reason nor is there any excuse to allow regulatory inconsistency to drive up costs and keep some consumers in the dark on matters that may affect their health," said Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga.

The vote Wednesday was a sign of the tremendous power of the food industry in Congress. Corporations and trade groups that joined the National Uniformity for Food Coalition, which backed the bill, have contributed more than $3 million to members in the 2005-06 election cycle and $31 million since 1998, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics.

A leading fund-raiser for the bill's chief sponsor, Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., has been lobbying on the bill.

But Rogers denied there was a backroom deal with the food industry. He said supporters of the bill simply believe federal standards work better than state standards on food safety.

"A chicken grown in Louisiana is going to end up on a plate in Michigan. Peas grown in Florida are going to end up in Louisiana," Rogers said.